I've been looking into having a gun made for me in a .300wthby. Once of the gun smiths that I talked with said he thought I'd be much happier with a .300win or .300wsm since the .300wthby is inherently not as accurate of a round.

Is there any truth to this?

I would just go to the .300win but I really like the ballistics on the .300wthby for shots on deer size animals up to 400yds.

Also, what is percieved to be the better round the .300win or .300wsm? From looking at the ballistics it appears the only thing the wsm gains you is a shorter action.

[ 01-20-2003, 00:02: Message edited by: GMaxson ]

If it were me i would go with the 300win mag. I have owned a three hundred weathebery for agout five years. It shoots ok about one inch at one hundred yards. It sure hurts to shoot after a few shots. I also have two Rem 40 xs built in 300win mag these are both single shot rifles. they both have kdf brakes. These two rifles shoot into the 2,s at one hundred yards. One of the things i love to do the most is to find a spot over looking awide open medow on opeaning day of deer seasion. With a laser ranger finder and my pet loads you own the valley. Beleave it or not it is not uncommon for me to run one hundred rounds through this gun in an afternoon of shooting squirrles.

If an extreme .30 is wanted then the .300 RUM will solve the Weatherby's freebore and headspace problems.

For a handy rifle the .300 WSM is a good choice.

I think it is important to listen to the comment about fatique with heavy magnums. A 300 win mag is strong to 1000yds, and won't beat you up. It has tons of load data and is very accurate using fired brass, which no longer headspaces off the rim, but rather the shoulder. From a design standpoint, the 300WSM has the right angles and powder column shape to be more inherently accurate, but that's not everything. I have a Rem VSSF in 300 win mag I shoot in 1000yd matches. It's bone stock and shoots under 1/2 moa (.3-.4)to 600, under 1 moa(.7-.8) at 1000. Good enough for what I need to do the job.

Certainly the 300 win brass will be cheaper, and survive more loadings.

I have a 30-378 wthby as well. Cases are evry expensive and only last 3 loadings. I have some 300 win mag going on 6 with no problems.

GMaxson,

Years ago Remington published their results of accuracy testing their M40X target rifles. The data for the various calibers was presented in the form of a graph, with group size on the vertical axis, and the calibers listed along the horizontal axix, from smaller to larger. The data showed that the .222 was most accurate, and the numbers increased gradually with cartridge size -- but it was not a tremendous difference. It did show that smaller cartridge and powder charge was "more accurate" (got better numbers) than larger. I suppose you could level this the inherent accuracy curve, which in really is an undefined term. The difference from .308 to .30-'06 to .300 Mag was small, but there.

With that said you are going to be hard pressed to measure the difference between the various .300s in hunting rifles.

jim dodd

I have a custom Model 700 in .300 Weatherby that shoots .75 inch consistently at 100 yards. A better shot could improve that, I'm sure, but the .300 off the bench gets tiresome for me after a few groups. If I were doing it now, I would probably go with the .300 Ultra Mag - slightly better ballistics and a better case design, in my opinion.